K. CHITRA Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the first and second respondents, the learned Government Advocate for the third respondent and the learned counsel for the fourth respondent and perused the records.

(2.) Briefly put the case of the petitioner is that her husband was working as sweeper with the fourth respondent; that he had deceased while in service on 11/7/2011; that she and her two minor children are the legal heirs of her deceased husband; that she being the wife of the deceased employee is eligible for appointment on compassionate ground; that she had approached the fourth respondent and submitted representation on 21/1/2012; and that as the said representation remained unconsidered, she had approached the third respondent/District Collector and submitted another representation, claiming that she did not receive any response from the fourth respondent with regard to her appointment on compassionate ground.

(3.) The petitioner further contended that she had submitted application once again on 9/9/2016; that the fourth respondent in response to application submitted by her under the public grievance redressal petition bearing No.101 of 2019, by the impugned proceedings dtd. 22/1/2019 claimed that her request for compassionate appointment was not considered as having been filed after five years after the death of her husband; and that there is no provision for providing a post on compassionate ground. It is contended that the action of respondent rejecting her application for compassionate appointment is highly illegal, arbitrary and against the policy of the State.